Whats the point in the "United Kingdom"?

Question

What benefit is it having a Uniited Knigdom, why don't England, Scotland, Wales (We'll forget about complex NI) have self governance.
There is no need for the Union anymore, the Scots and Welsh don't like the English and the English don't like propping up the Scottish and Welsh economies.
So how about it, self rule but remain strong military and economic allies?
For the record I am English

Answer 1

I think it would be good to split the union especially now since its the 300th anniversary in 2007. I dont want to start arguments about countries which would survive outside of it or which countries support others. It is a myth that England supports the neighbouring countries though. Sure; Scotland for example is given a hefty supplemet every year to look after itself but only from money the UK (NOT England - contrary to popular belief) has earned ie from oil (which is actually Scottish anyway)and tourism - which all nations in the kingdom earn. Please dont continue flaming or anything. I havent said anything to insult anyone and everything I have said is fact. btw Robespierre made the classic fault assuming Wales and Scotland were in England. They are not and never have been, I strongly suggest you don't say that when you are in one of those smaller UK nations. You may be risking your health ;)

Answer 2

The UK wasn't created as a convenience for its people - it was created piecemeal, almost by accident, as one king became ruler of more than one country by conquest (Wales, Ireland) or inheritance (Scotland).

All of the countries of the Union have benefitted at various times and in various ways - and all have given back too. Northern Ireland currently benefits the most from subsidies (and will continue to, with Gordon Brown's £50bn plan to invest there) - but prior to the troubles was not treated as an equal part. Scotland brings North Sea Oil to the table but benefits from more central spending than other regions. Wales and England go back almost a thousand years, to the point where it's sometimes hard to imagine them as separate.

The problem for the future of the Union is the unequal sharing of power. All four home countries now have a different constitutional position, different areas where they enjoy self-determination, and we also have the anomaly of Scots (and to a lesser extent Welsh) MPs voting on laws and spending which won't apply in their home country.

We either need an equal settlement, or we need to dissolve the various unions. I rather hope we stay together, for the sake of our common heritage, but not if it means being a second-class member of the alliance. And I think most Scots probably agree - so much of their national identity is tied up in hating and feeling oppressed by the English!

Answer 3

Sounds great doesn't it? Til you look further into it!There are serious problems with the idea of an English Parliament. It's not at all clear that people in England want one for a start. They massively rejected elected English regional assemblies, which Labour saw as the best way to correct any constitutional imbalances. I suspect they would also reject the idea of federalism too - for that is what we are talking about.
If the UK constitution were to be "rebalanced" so that an English parliament took over domestic affairs, there would need to be a new federal level of government created to manage UK-wide functions such as defence, foreign affairs, economic and monetary policy, constitutional relations and so on. There would probably need to be a supreme court too, and a written constitution to define the powers of the different levels of government. British people would have to get used to electing a wholly new tier of government - the UK government. There would be separation of powers, with - on present showings - a Labour-led federal government going head to head with a Conservative leadership in an English parliament. Taxation would also have to be disaggregated, so that specific revenues could be assigned to state and federal levels, with appropriate fiscal redistribution to take account of regional economic disparities. It's no easy option.
But federalism is the only coherent answer to the anomalies created by the present "asymmetrical devolution". There is clearly a potential problem about Scottish MPs voting on English bills, such as education, when English MPs have no such rights to vote on Scottish legislation. However, I'm not sure how many English voters have ever actually heard of the West Lothian question, and I suspect very few could explain what the problem is. This seems to me to be the key question here. Do English people care enough about Scottish devolution to go the distance? Is the governance of England so seriously distorted by the marginal influence of Scottish MPs in the Commons that we need a new American-style constitution? I don't think so - but I am open to persuasion.

***gvih2g2***
I did say,I was open to persuasion.

Answer 4

Scotland and Wales do have self governance, up to a point. If you are talking UK you can not forget NI, as they form part of the UK. But, you are right, in as much as Scots and Welsh seem to benefit at the expense of the English....and yet they still deride us.

Answer 5

I agree, it just creates discontent and let's face it, hatred sometimes (ugh, quite often!)
However, it's very unfair to say that the Engish "prop up" the Scottish and Welsh economies. They pumped those countries dry! I'm all for letting Wales and Scotland become countries in their own right.

Answer 6

You got a point. But the bigger picture is this: All these little states want to be independent all over Europe. In Spain (Catalina), England (Scotland and Wales), France(Basque), Serbia(Montenegro, Kosovo) etc etc. Then they want to join the EU which has full integration as its main policy, that is one currency, ultimately one policy and standard laws etc. Are these independence freaks more stupid than they look from where I'm sitting? And the Kurds in Turkey as well. Shouldn't the EU refuse to accept members who have already broken away from one engagement as unfit for social life?

Answer 7

the main reason westminster are scared to seperate is because they will not only lose revenue but also can you imagine the outcry if the English government went to war with someone and the other nations wouldn't back them..or at worst/best decided to invade england?
personally i think the countries should all be independant, have their own tax raising powers etc. we would only have ourselves to blame when things go wrong.
I also fail to see how someone in south east of england can associate or know whats best for someone living in one of our outlying islands like outer hebrides or shetland

as for scots mp's voting on english welsh matters.. erm the english have done the same to scots for centuries.. used us as guinee pigs. remember the poll tax.. we had it for a year before introduction to england.

Answer 8

There are good points in the United Kingdom.
UK stand for" United we stand, divided we fall"
That"s the glory of the liberation of freedom for the battle of Britain and "God save the Queen" from Pearl Harbour back in
world war two on planet earth.
"God save the Queen" is the Garden of Eden on planet earth.
After world war two.
Where ever UK goes The scotman with the Bag-pipe goes
along too so was members of the UK too.
After independence some how some where in time everyone got lost with the gifts of life that does not change with time but stays in time on planet earth.
Now the little ones want to throw that gifts of life by going seperate way with "My Way" in planet of apes..
What will grand-pa and grand-ma will say about that after all the hardwork and sacrifice back in world war two for the glory of UK.

Answer 9

I'm Welsh and don't mind being part of the UK. And as for don't like the English well I'm fine with them - I live with an Englishman and am having a baby with him!

I don't know if it would really benefit the individual countries to have self governance, only if they paid real attention to what was going on within that country and made life better for the people who live there. I mean housing, jobs, health care, tackling poverty, education etc.

And it would be weird having to get a passport to go accross the Severn Bridge! Or if people on one side of the Bristol channel lived under one set of laws and those of us on the other side lived under another!!!

Answer 10

"Spoiled" heavily, American-born right here, i think like we are the only u . s . interior the full international who's voters ***** approximately each little thing, commencing from their weight problems (Ha, blame your self and your loss of self-discipline) to the rampant sueing for the main idiotic element (McDonalds, the guy who sued Michael Jordan because of the fact they seem alike). additionally, we at the instant are not on the precise of the international, and we tend accountable issues on all and sundry else. Even our very own newshounds, columnists have little national satisfaction. sturdy politicions get a undesirable rep, and we additionally voted for Bush two times.